MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2000455816 · doi:10.2310/7070.2002.34526

Observations on the Early Results of Treatment of Recurrent Respiratory Papillomatosis Using Cidofovir

2002· review· en· W2000455816 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Andréanne Waddell, William S. Crysdale

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Otolaryngology · 2002
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCervical Cancer and HPV Research
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCidofovirRecurrent Respiratory PapillomatosisMedicinePapillomatosisCarbon dioxide laserSurgeryLarynxDermatologyLaser surgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To document the response of two patients with severe recurrent laryngeal papillomatosis following treatment with intralesional cidofovir in conjunction with carbon-dioxide laser evaporation. SETTING: Tertiary referral centre. METHODS: Retrospective review of treatment of two patients followed up over a 12-month period. INTERVENTION: Microlaryngoscopy and carbon-dioxide laser evaporation of lesions followed by intralesional injection of cidofovir. OUTCOME MEASURES: Photodocumentation and descriptive statistical representation of intervals between endoscopic treatment. The disease was staged according to severity on endoscopy. RESULTS: Initially, both patients showed a marked improvement of disease. However, the disease relapsed to a significant extent. Overall, there was no demonstrable change in the frequency of required endoscopies despite subjective improvement of the airway. CONCLUSION: Cidofovir may be of some benefit in the management of recurrent respiratory papillomatosis, but further studies are still required.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.306
GPT teacher head0.414
Teacher spread0.107 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations15
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of OtolaryngologySame topicCervical Cancer and HPV ResearchFrench-language works237,207